Hi,
I thought there was a request to make memroy resource controller (CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR) availele in Fedora10 age. (But not configured.)
I'd like to request memory cgroup configured in Fedora 11. (I'm sorry if too late.)
Comapring current implementation(2.6.28) with the version half year ago,
- There is no pointer from struct page.
IIRC, this pointer was a big obstacle for the merge request.
BTW, what kernel version Fedora11 will be based on ? I prefer 2.6.29-rc version of memory cgroup rather than 2.6.28 ;)
Thanks, -Kame
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 02:07:45PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
Hi,
Hi!
I thought there was a request to make memroy resource controller (CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR) availele in Fedora10 age. (But not configured.)
I'd like to request memory cgroup configured in Fedora 11. (I'm sorry if too late.)
This is what we currently have enabled in Fedora 11's generic config:
kyle@minerva ~/rpms/kernel/devel $ grep CGROUP config-generic CONFIG_NET_CLS_CGROUP=y CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED=y CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR=y CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_SWAP=y CONFIG_CGROUPS=y # CONFIG_CGROUP_DEBUG is not set CONFIG_CGROUP_NS=y CONFIG_CGROUP_CPUACCT=y CONFIG_CGROUP_DEVICE=y CONFIG_CGROUP_FREEZER=y CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_CONT=y kyle@minerva ~/rpms/kernel/devel $
Comapring current implementation(2.6.28) with the version half year ago,
- There is no pointer from struct page.
IIRC, this pointer was a big obstacle for the merge request.
Right, we were concerned it would impact performance because it pushed struct page passed the size of a single cacheline.
BTW, what kernel version Fedora11 will be based on ? I prefer 2.6.29-rc version of memory cgroup rather than 2.6.28 ;)
The current plan is for F11 to be based on 2.6.29, but it's possible (though extremely unlikely) that if .29 stabilizes very quickly that we might end up on .30, but I wouldn't bet on it. :)
Thanks, -Kame
cheers, Kyle
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 00:15:44 -0500 Kyle McMartin kyle@infradead.org wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 02:07:45PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
Hi,
Hi!
I thought there was a request to make memroy resource controller (CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR) availele in Fedora10 age. (But not configured.)
I'd like to request memory cgroup configured in Fedora 11. (I'm sorry if too late.)
This is what we currently have enabled in Fedora 11's generic config:
kyle@minerva ~/rpms/kernel/devel $ grep CGROUP config-generic CONFIG_NET_CLS_CGROUP=y CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED=y CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR=y CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_SWAP=y CONFIG_CGROUPS=y # CONFIG_CGROUP_DEBUG is not set CONFIG_CGROUP_NS=y CONFIG_CGROUP_CPUACCT=y CONFIG_CGROUP_DEVICE=y CONFIG_CGROUP_FREEZER=y CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_CONT=y kyle@minerva ~/rpms/kernel/devel $
Wow, thanks !
(I wonder CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_CONT may be stale config name..)
Comapring current implementation(2.6.28) with the version half year ago,
- There is no pointer from struct page.
IIRC, this pointer was a big obstacle for the merge request.
Right, we were concerned it would impact performance because it pushed struct page passed the size of a single cacheline.
BTW, what kernel version Fedora11 will be based on ? I prefer 2.6.29-rc version of memory cgroup rather than 2.6.28 ;)
The current plan is for F11 to be based on 2.6.29, but it's possible (though extremely unlikely) that if .29 stabilizes very quickly that we might end up on .30, but I wouldn't bet on it. :)
Thank you for quick response, very informative!
Regards, -Kame
Thanks, -Kame
cheers, Kyle
* Kyle McMartin kyle@infradead.org [2009-01-26 00:42:45]:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 02:20:56PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
Wow, thanks !
(I wonder CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_CONT may be stale config name..)
Entirely possible... sadly we don't prune the config as often as we should so stale config options linger for a while. :)
I had requested Dave Jones for enablement and he added the memory resource controller. It is enabled in F11.
kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Balbir Singh -
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki -
Kyle McMartin